If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)

At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)

Well...I stand corrected that Russert at least spoke with him...
It's too bad it was in 06' when no one cared. As the Dem presidential nominee there would have been more scrutiny.
I'm no Palin fanboy either... You choices are someone who is essentially a good but ignorant person or aa 30 year entrenched elitist loudmouth whose only "experience" is spending other peoples money. Her lack of experience translated into a VP position. What the democrats chose as their POTUS nominee was an enigma of ignorance simply cloaked in a law degree. I don't make any distinction......ignorance is ignorance.
As we speak Obama's looking more and more about what the Dems voted against. We'll get what we deserve.

Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown

Couric's interview with Palin did enlighten a lot of people as to her complete "unreadiness" for national office.

Sarah probably would've given an equally "unready for office" interview prior to her election for Mayor of Wasilla, and again prior to her election for Governor. The remarkable thing about Palin is that on both counts, she got up to speed quickly and precipitated remarkable positive change for the good of her citizenry. I can easily disregard a clumsy interview, especially when I know it's probably being edited for maximum negativity by her detractors. Her record is what speaks volumes. Obama may give great interviews, but his record (or lack thereof) is tragically devoid of any accomplishments.

People with your inability to see past the superficial to real substance is why Obummer won and our nation made the gravest of errors in our 230-some years of election history. Thanks to your lack of intelligence, we won't be seeing the return of prosperity for a long time, if ever!

I can easily disregard a clumsy interview, especially when I know it's probably being edited for maximum negativity by her detractors. Her record is what speaks volumes. Obama may give great interviews, but his record (or lack thereof) is tragically devoid of any accomplishments.

You have made this same accusation dozens of times previously and as many times I have said I voted for John McCain in the 2008 presidential race - out of a sense of loyalty to my deceased father, an MCPO with the USN, that happened to serve with said candidate.

If you wish to continue shitting on the memory of Chief Duffy - do so at the risk of offending others in this forum serving presently and veterans that have served. He served your country for well over 306,000 hours and if you want to take a shit on that - feel free to do so. He paid for your privilege to do so. I honored my commitment to place a vote for him and if you refuse to believe that - then you’re much smaller piece of shit than you think.

Remember what day it is - biccat.

We're not questioning your father's service, just your integrity.

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior

Again, I don't have any problem in general with what you're saying. I just don't see how Couric "ripped" Palin. Was she not supposed to ask her about the economic bailout? Was the foreign policy question a surprise? How about Supreme Court decisions, since Palin has made a position of opposing Roe v Wade? The "what newspapers do you read" question I thought trivial, but it's been asked of D's and R's before.

SPECIFICALLY, WHICH QUESTION THAT COURIC ASKED (OR EVEN COMBINATION OF QUESTIONS) WAS UNFAIR? HOW DID THE EVIL LIBRUL MEDIA TAKE ADVANTAGE OF POOR SWEET SARAH IN THE COURIC INTERVIEW?????

Maybe she should have asked regarding her recipe for Moose Chili?

The issue is not what was asked, it was how the answers were edited after the fact in order to make her appear clueless. For example, the following exchanges were removed from the final Couric interview:

(2:58) Couric: What, specifically, in your view, could be done to convince the new government in Pakistan to take a harder, tougher line against terrorists in that country?

Palin: At a time when new leadership comes in, that is the opportunity to forge better, tighter, more productive relationships and that’s what we’ll take advantage of with new leadership in the US and in Pakistan. And I’m sure that President Zardari, too, will agree with us as we commit to the support that Pakistan needs, that other nations in the region need, in order to win this war on terrorism. (3:32)

(5:39) Couric: But what lessons do you think you have learned as you’ve watched this unfold in terms of implementing the democracy and the challenges inherent in that goal?

Palin: Well, one is that America cannot be counted on to do this solely, to be the savior of every other nation, but we need friends and we need allies and we need this nation-building effort and we need to forge new alliances, and that is what a new election will provide opportunity to do.

Couric: What happened if the goal of democracy, Governor Palin, doesn’t produce the desired outcome, for example in Gaza, the US pushed hard for elections and Hamas won.

Palin: Especially in that region, though, we have got to protect those and support those who do seek democracy and do seek protections for the people who live there. And you know, we’re seeing today, in the last couple of days here in New York, a speaker, a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and express such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends—Israel—and we’re hearing the evil that he speaks. And if hearing him doesn’t allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, expecially there in the Mideast, then nothing will.

If Americans are not waking up to understand what it is that he represents, then nothing is going to wake us up and we will be lulled into some kind of false sense of security that perhaps Americans were a part of before 9/11.(7:25)

Nice, concise, intelligent answers, but for some reason, they didn't make it into the final cut. Then, of course, there is the ABC interview, which was even more blatantly distorted through editing. The cut parts are in bold:

GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

PALIN: Right, right.

GIBSON: I’m talking about somebody who’s a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state … these last couple of weeks … it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite

By cutting out her answer, Gibson turned an affirmative response into a negative one. That's completely dishonest.
And:

GIBSON: Let’s start, because we are near Russia, let’s start with Russia and Georgia.

The administration has said we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

PALIN: First off, we’re going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain’s running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we’ve got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep…

GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.

PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there. I think it was unfortunate. That manifestation that we saw with that invasion of Georgia shows us some steps backwards that Russia has recently taken away from the race toward a more democratic nation with democratic ideals. That’s why we have to keep an eye on Russia.

And, Charlie, you’re in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They’re very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We’ve learned lessons from that in our relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.

We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

Again, lucid, clear answers that were cut to remove any indication that Palin understood the issues and saw more subtle nuances than simply "living next door" to Russia, which became the liberal talking point.